Pelosi: A Strong Backer of Plan to Attack Syria

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) speaks to reporters after a meeting on Syria with President Barack Obama at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 3, 2013. (EPA/Shawn Thew)

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), often derided by Republican critics as a far-left San Francisco liberal, has emerged as one of Congress’s strongest proponents of White House plans to attack Syria.

Even though many members of her rank and file are skeptical or outright opposed to the action, Ms. Pelosi emerged from a morning meeting with President Barack Obama and other congressional leaders Tuesday to deliver a robust case for lawmakers to rally behind the call for retaliation against the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime.

“It is really something that, from a humanitarian standpoint, cannot be ignored, or else we cannot say never again,’’ she said. “Secondly, from a national security standpoint, we have to send a very clear message to those who have weapons of mass destruction of any variety that they should forget about using them.’’

Mrs. Pelosi, who recounted how antiwar sentiment had even filtered down to her 5-year-old grandchild, will be a crucial lieutenant in Mr. Obama’s drive to persuade a skeptical, war-weary Congress to back his military plans when it comes to a vote in the House and Senate next week.

With many Republicans in the GOP-controlled House expected to vote against the resolution authorizing military action, the White House will be heavily dependent on Democrats to help get them to the 218 votes that constitute a majority of the House.

She said, in answer to reporters’ questions, that she would not “whip’’ the vote — Capitol Hill jargon for when party leaders lean on lawmakers to vote the party line. But she made it clear that she would aggressively make the case for her fellow Democrats to join her in supporting the president.

“On these kinds of issues, it’s not a question of whipping, its a question of discussing to make sure that people have the information that they need to make an informed decision,’’ she said. “And then members have to decide: Do they want to ignore the facts that this humanitarian disaster took place, or not?’’

Mrs. Pelosi’s statement Tuesday was not the first time she had stepped out in support of attacking Syria. She was hawkish in her response as soon as the leadership was briefed on Mr. Obama’s plans. And Saturday, during a conference call for House Democrats to be briefed on the situation, she even asked Secretary of State John Kerry if she could interrupt to make clear her support for the use of force to punish the Assad regime.

Democrats said that Mrs. Pelosi’s support is crucial, but that the most important element of the drive to build support among skeptical Democrats is to continue holding briefings, which were held for the third day in a row and will continue through this week, for lawmakers to ask questions.

“As the intelligence bakes in, as people begin to hear more from their districts and as the debate ensues, there will be a sense of momentum on this,,’’ said Rep. Steve Israel (D., N.Y.), a close ally of Mrs. Pelosi. “I don’t know whether that brings us to 219 votes or 217 votes, but I do believe there will be a sense of momentum on this.”

Responding to questions from reporters about whether Mr. Obama would proceed with the strike against Syria of Congress did not approve the resolution, she pointed out that in 1999, President Bill Clinton went ahead with air strikes in the Balkans even after the House rejected a resolution authorizing it by a 213-213 tie. On that vote, Mrs. Pelosi was a yes.

Just hours after the meeting at the White House, Mrs. Pelosi sent a letter to all 200 House Democrats urging them to inform their constituents about the evidence that the Assad regime had used chemical weapons on its own citizens.

“The evidence of these attacks is clear, convincing, and devastating,’’ she said in the letter. “It is in our national interest to respond to the Syrian government’s unspeakable use of chemical weapons. Indeed, it has been, and remains, a core pillar of our national security – under Democratic and Republican administrations – to prevent, limit, and halt the spread and use of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. This is a matter of national, regional, and global security.’’

About Washington Wire

Washington Wire is one of the oldest standing features in American journalism. Since the Wire launched on Sept. 20, 1940, the Journal has offered readers an informal look at the capital. Now online, the Wire provides a succession of glimpses at what’s happening behind hot stories and warnings of what to watch for in the days ahead. The Wire is led by Reid J. Epstein, with contributions from the rest of the bureau. Washington Wire now also includes Think Tank, our home for outside analysis from policy and political thinkers.